Is Barrack Obama a communist?, page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 3 times

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 10:02 AM by Witness2008

reply to post by Clearskies

More than half of the voters in this election did not see his staement as a put down. I understand the remark of small town Pennsylvania as being one of inclusion for an excluded population, that he would finally address their needs where the last two administrations had not.

You seem to think that Obama's experiences are of a corrupt nature, I see them as information that will make our President an aware and empathetic leader.

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 10:14 AM by djpaec

As to the whole Pennyslvania gaffe. Only 22% of the counties in the United States voted more republican as opposed to the 2004 elections.
As this election map demonstrates:
img.photobucket.com...
Looks like 10-15% of Pennsylvanian counties voted more Republicans than 2004.

And as the old saying goes, keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

[edit on 10-11-2008 by djpaec]

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 10:21 AM by madhatr137

Barack Obama is not a Communist, or a Socialist, but a member of the Democratic party in the American, Democratic, political system. Whether he shares some left-wing, deemably "socialist" or "communist", ideas or not is an irrelevant political point because, regardless, he has been democratically elected by both the popular vote and has secured the Electoral College votes. Also, to the same point, whether he shares some left-wing, deemably "socialist" or "communist", ideas or not is relevant because there is nothing in Democratic Theory that says that a democracy will cease to exist if a chosen political leader is influenced in their decision-making process or policies by ideals that are deemed by the far-right to be "socialist" or "communist." There are plenty of "successful" Social Democracies out there...

It's called the "Marketplace of Ideas," look up S.C. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. in Abrams v. United States.

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 10:34 AM by Tricky63

Originally posted by Clearskies
reply to post by Tricky63

I don't know much about Martin Luther King, but, all those people who voted for Obama, CAN'T ALL BE communists.
The Voice of the Revolutionary Communist Party of America LOVES that he won, though.
ChangeAnd the Klan was happy when Ronnie R won.I remember Klan saying hes the best thing that ever happen to America.Ronnie R wasnt a Klan member nor do I believe he agreed with their ideas.As much as I didnt like his politics I dont believe that for a second. Obama won.....get....over....it.

[edit on 10-11-2008 by Clearskies]

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 11:57 AM by HunkaHunka

The mere question that is being posed is akin to mccarthyism.

It's an assasination attempt on the character of the President Elect. And since he has made no actions as President, it is simply an unjustified pre-emptive attack on the man.

When will America learn that character assasinations are immature and lead to nothing but divisiveness?

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 03:44 PM by Clearskies

reply to post by Tricky63

I don't condone the Klan and their nominees. Fascism and communism aren't that far apart in practice.
Obama will be our president and BELIEVE YOU ME, I would be JUST as on top of it, if McCain was elected and THEN we found out that he was brought up from birth in some sort of cabal. Read my thread about the Franklin cover-up scandal and the Republican connection, please.
Of course we both know about CFR, Trilateral commission, Bilderberg, bohemian grove, etc....
Marxist organizations are JUST as scary. Are they not?

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 03:50 PM by Clearskies

reply to post by HunkaHunka

Some believe McCarthy was right!
Please explain where he was wrong.
Of course, that could have been a smokescreen for globalists diverting attention AWAY from other crimes. Who knows?
I don't trust many politicians, do you?

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 08:29 PM by ProfEmeritus

reply to post by HunkaHunka

The mere question that is being posed is akin to mccarthyism.

Please, stop the name calling. Raising a question, as the OP did, is a valid method of discovery. Do you wish to stifle honest debate? You state that people should not assault character, and yet YOU USE the word McCarthyism.

Personally, I think it IS a VALID QUESTION to ask. His mentor was an avowed communist.
The purpose of ATS is to DEBATE issues, conspiracies and theories. The OP put forth a VALID post. You can either choose to ignore it, agree with your reasons, or respectfully disagree, along with your reasons. It is YOU who is name-calling, and that goes against the ATS T & C's.

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 08:34 PM by Lucid Lunacy

reply to post by Clearskies

You didn't address any of my questions.

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 09:06 PM by ProfEmeritus

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

But have you read about Communism itself? I mean outside of trying to determine if Obama is one or not? Just Communism itself.

Well, let me address you questions.
First of all, Wiki is hardly a source that would be considered the definitive source on Communism.
Furthermore, communism, as implemented in the 20th century, was far from a minimal-government implementation. The USSR certainly felt that they had implemented communism, and the government structure there was MASSIVE. In fact, it was repressive. Now, if you wish to discuss "theoretical communism", if there is such an animal, then fine, but I doubt that is what the OP was talking about.

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 09:20 PM by Lucid Lunacy

reply to post by ProfEmeritus

And you didn't address any of my questions either

I was not talking about "theoretical communism". I was trying to establish want the basic structure of a communist society would be, so that we could see whether or not this matches up with Obama's policies and general direction...

As for Wiki, did you notice I said "here is some quick info"? I have read much more 'definitive' reading on communism, socialism and related political theory. I was not attempting to turn this thread into a discussion about the merit of them.

[edit on 10-11-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 09:21 PM by Lucid Lunacy

I will post it again:

Honestly... setting aside whether you like Obama or not. Whether you like democrats or not. Do you honestly believe the POTUS (Obama) wants a classless society without Government, or very limited Government ??..

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 09:50 PM by ProfEmeritus

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

Apparently, you did not connect the dots.
You asked a QUESTION that was, according to what I posted in reply, a NON-SEQUITUR. You define communism as having limited or no government. I addressed the fact that there has been no ACTUAL implementation of such a system, and yet, we certainly would call the old USSR a COMMUNIST nation.
The way you posed the question, you are NOT talking about COMMUNISM, you might as well be asking about a UNICORN. Therefore, answering YOUR question is meaningless, as to indicating whether OBAMA is a communist or not.
Rephrase the question, eliminate the clause about limited or no government, and maybe people would answer your question.

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 09:57 PM by Lucid Lunacy

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus

Rephrase the question, eliminate the clause about limited or no government, and maybe people would answer your question.

Okay

Honestly... setting aside whether you like Obama or not. Whether you like democrats or not. Do you honestly believe the POTUS (Obama) wants a society

Is this to your liking?

We are making progress. Thanks for the eye opener.

FYI, maybe if you leave your caps-lock on I will connect the dots.

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 10:00 PM by Clearskies

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

Communism.org.

Communism
Scientific definition:

A classless society with no exploitation. No state machine used by one section of the population to oppress another section. No need for professional armies or police forces. No use of production for profit or exchange. Society runs in accord with the principle: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

They give this definition for

Socialism
Scientific definition:

A society run by the working class rather than the bourgeoisie. The state machine is used to defend working class interests against those who still have wealth or power and who will attempt to return society to the capitalist system and bourgeois rule. Socialism is the period of transition between the overthrow of bourgeois rule and the development of a classless, communist society.

Marx said that the end result of communism would be a classless, government-less society where all would be free and equal. It didn't work out so well.
Are you asking me if I think Obama wants that?
I would have to say,'yes, eventually', from what I've read.
Is there something I haven't addressed?

[edit on 10-11-2008 by Clearskies]

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 10:05 PM by Lucid Lunacy

reply to post by ProfEmeritus

^^^

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 10:09 PM by Lucid Lunacy

Originally posted by Clearskies
Are you asking me if I think Obama wants that?
I would have to say,'yes, eventually', from what I've read.
Is there something I haven't addressed?

Thanks for the reply. You addressed it now.

I am not sure if I truly see how you are connecting Obama to that progression though? Democrats are big government and big corporation... that is quite literally opposite of what you just posted.

You believe he is purely a communist in disguise? I am not sure if I understand how you are forming this conclusion, if you are?

[edit on 10-11-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 10:15 PM by ProfEmeritus

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

Now I can answer your question:

Yes.

Of course, if you had searched, you would have found this thread that I started:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

and you would not have needed to ask me, as my original thread was quite explicit. That thread, by the way, had 235 replies.

[edit on 10-11-2008 by ProfEmeritus]

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 10:24 PM by Lucid Lunacy

reply to post by ProfEmeritus

If I had searched??

I was asking Clearskies, the creator of this thread, the questions I posed. You took the liberty upon yourself, I was not asking you. It's more then fine that you replied to them. But get off your high horse.

reply posted on 10-11-2008 @ 10:27 PM by Clearskies

reply to post by ProfEmeritus

Hey!
I didn't see that thread! Thanks!

[edit on 10-11-2008 by Clearskies]

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 >> ^^TOP^^